Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Soleimankheel and Others v the Netherlands - 41509/12 (Communicated Case) [2017] ECHR 736 (16 July 2017)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2017/736.html
Cite as: [2017] ECHR 736
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 41509/12
Mirwais SOLEIMANKHEEL and Others
against the Netherlands
lodged on 4 July 2012
STATEMENT OF FACTS
THE FACTS
The applicants, Mr Mirwais Soleimankheel, his wife Mrs Mahmudeh Sadat, and their children Eqbal, Alkahel, Soleiman and Hewa Soleimankheel, are Afghan nationals who were born in 1971, 1973, 1995, 1998, 2004 and 2009 respectively. Mrs Sadat and the children are currently residing in the Netherlands; Mr Soleimankheel was expelled from the Netherlands to Afghanistan on 21 July 2012. They are represented before the Court by Mr P.C.M. van Schijndel, a lawyer practising in The Hague.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be briefly summarised as follows.
On 8 April 1998 Mr Soleimankheel and Mrs Sadat unsuccessfully applied for asylum in the Netherlands. Article 1F of the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees was held against Mr Soleimankheel. Subsequently an exclusion order (ongewenstverklaring) was imposed on him. A further appeal (hoger beroep) lodged by Mr Soleimankheel against the decision to impose an exclusion order on him is currently still pending before the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State (Afdeling Bestuursrecht van de Raad van State), but does not enjoy suspensive effect.
On 15 April 2009 Mrs Sadat and the children were granted residence permits pursuant to the terms of a general amnesty for certain asylum seekers who had applied for asylum before 1 April 2001. They are in the process of obtaining Dutch nationality.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complain that the expulsion of Mr Soleimankheel exposes him to a real risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention. They also submit that the exclusion order imposed on Mr Soleimankheel constitutes a violation of their right to respect for family life as guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention. Finally, they complain that Mr Soleimankheel did not have an effective remedy as required by Article 13 in respect of the decision to impose an exclusion order on him.